• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 24 April 2015 9379 OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Friday, 24 April 2015 The Council continued to meet at Nine o'clock MEMBERS PRESENT: THE PRESIDENT THE HONOURABLE JASPER TSANG YOK-SING, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-LAM, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG DR THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING, J.P. THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ABRAHAM SHEK LAI-HIM, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TOMMY CHEUNG YU-YAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE VINCENT FANG KANG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-HING, B.B.S., M.H. PROF THE HONOURABLE JOSEPH LEE KOK-LONG, S.B.S., J.P., Ph.D., R.N. 9380 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 24 April 2015 THE HONOURABLE JEFFREY LAM KIN-FUNG, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ANDREW LEUNG KWAN-YUEN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE WONG TING-KWONG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE RONNY TONG KA-WAH, S.C. THE HONOURABLE CYD HO SAU-LAN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE STARRY LEE WAI-KING, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE LAM TAI-FAI, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAK-KAN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN KIN-POR, B.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG KWOK-CHE THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-KIN, S.B.S. THE HONOURABLE IP KWOK-HIM, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS REGINA IP LAU SUK-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE PAUL TSE WAI-CHUN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALAN LEONG KAH-KIT, S.C. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KWOK-HUNG THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP THE HONOURABLE NG LEUNG-SING, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE STEVEN HO CHUN-YIN THE HONOURABLE FRANKIE YICK CHI-MING LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 24 April 2015 9381 THE HONOURABLE WU CHI-WAI, M.H. THE HONOURABLE YIU SI-WING THE HONOURABLE GARY FAN KWOK-WAI THE HONOURABLE MA FUNG-KWOK, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHARLES PETER MOK, J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN CHI-CHUEN DR THE HONOURABLE KENNETH CHAN KA-LOK THE HONOURABLE CHAN YUEN-HAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG, B.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE KENNETH LEUNG THE HONOURABLE ALICE MAK MEI-KUEN, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE KWOK KA-KI THE HONOURABLE KWOK WAI-KEUNG THE HONOURABLE DENNIS KWOK THE HONOURABLE CHRISTOPHER CHEUNG WAH-FUNG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE SIN CHUNG-KAI, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE IP KIN-YUEN THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LIAO CHEUNG-KONG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE POON SIU-PING, B.B.S., M.H. 9382 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 24 April 2015 THE HONOURABLE TANG KA-PIU, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE CHIANG LAI-WAN, J.P. IR DR THE HONOURABLE LO WAI-KWOK, B.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHUNG KWOK-PAN THE HONOURABLE CHRISTOPHER CHUNG SHU-KUN, B.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TONY TSE WAI-CHUEN, B.B.S. MEMBERS ABSENT: THE HONOURABLE ALBERT HO CHUN-YAN THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN DR THE HONOURABLE PRISCILLA LEUNG MEI-FUN, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KA-LAU THE HONOURABLE WONG YUK-MAN THE HONOURABLE CLAUDIA MO THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL TIEN PUK-SUN, B.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JAMES TIEN PEI-CHUN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAN-PAN, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE FERNANDO CHEUNG CHIU-HUNG DR THE HONOURABLE HELENA WONG PIK-WAN DR THE HONOURABLE ELIZABETH QUAT, J.P. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 24 April 2015 9383 PUBLIC OFFICER ATTENDING: DR THE HONOURABLE KO WING-MAN, B.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH CLERKS IN ATTENDANCE: MISS ODELIA LEUNG HING-YEE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MR MATTHEW LOO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL 9384 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 24 April 2015 BILLS Committee Stage CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Good Morning, Honourable Members. Committee now proceeds to the second debate. Does any Member wish to speak? APPROPRIATION BILL 2015 MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Chairman, it appears that a quorum is lacking this morning. I hope you will summon Members to the meeting under Rule 17(3) of the Rules of Procedure. CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members to the Chamber. (After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members entered the Chamber) CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will Members please return to their seats. Does any Member wish to speak? MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Good Morning, Chairman. Basically, most of my arguments for reducing the expenditure for the Security Bureau were already spelt out yesterday, but I have to add one more point because I mentioned yesterday the rationale and logic for mentioning that the policemen had turned into urban management officers, which were even worse than public security officers. I would like to elaborate further my underlying idea and the gravity of the issue, so that Hong Kong people would come to know that these changes will actually bring disasters to the Police Force and Hong Kong alike. In particular, I hope members of the Police Force who still have conscience and believe in their professionalism, especially the Secretary for Security, can reflect deeply on the series of changes recently and the related circumstances. It LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 24 April 2015 9385 is because I was asked by some pro-government Members yesterday why I criticized LAI Tung-kwok so severely. They said that the Secretary, who was only performing his duties, was actually not as bad as Andy TSANG and LEUNG Chun-ying. If Members understand the operation of government departments, they should know that all civil servants, from high-ranking to low-ranking ones, including front-line operational staff, are interrelated. It is most imperative for high-ranking individuals to effect monitoring and supervision in addressing problems or allowing some of their subordinates to discharge their duties. Some pro-government Members argue that even the Secretary for Security cannot do anything to bring about changes. If Andy TSANG insists on certain acts, coupled with the support from Beijing and the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government (LOCPG) in the Hong Kong Special Administration Region, the Secretary for Security will be unable to influence the decisions of his subordinates despite his dissatisfaction ― some Secretaries of Departments and Bureau Directors might feel dissatisfied, too. I consider such a remark utterly ridiculous. If the Secretary for Security thinks that the enforcement of policies or instructions by the Commissioner of Police, some of the acts committed according to the so-called professionalism or professional decisions, or the circumstances thus resulted, are in breach of certain policies and principles, police guidelines or even the law, can he as an accountable Bureau Director ― even if he is a man in the street, a Hongkonger or a member of the public with conscience ― put up with the Commissioner? The pro-government Members say that he is only doing his job because he can do nothing to influence the LOCPG should it insist on having its own way. Such an argument is totally unacceptable to me. This is like some German military officers being convicted of criminal offences for executing certain instructions given by Nazi Germany, including participating in the massacre of prisoners of war in concentration camps, during the Second World War. Such being the case, if the policies or instructions executed are in violation of the law, conscience, and the basic values of survival, one cannot evade his or her responsibility with such an excuse because the acts of the Police in maintaining law and order, so to speak, during the Umbrella Movement over the past several months were in violation of human nature. Yesterday, I had pointed out time and again that, for instance, it is against the police internal guidelines for a police officer to hit someone's head with a baton. It is also against the law for the Police to conspire with triads in suppressing the occupiers. Back in the 1950s or 1960s, the Anti-Triad Squads 9386 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 24 April 2015 were criticized by many critics and the media for being the "most corrupt" because they were literally the hotbeds of triads. It was only after a gradual cleaning up process that the Police began to build up their professional image. Why did I compare the Hong Kong Police Force to urban management officers yesterday and say that they did not even match up to public security officers? The series of acts I mentioned just now are to be blamed. It is also not wrong to say that public security officers in the Mainland behaved in that manner in the 1980s or 1990s. In the last three to five years, however, we have no longer seen them behave in such a dirty and despicable manner as the Hong Kong police officers did during the Occupy period. Have you ever seen Mainland public security officers hit the head of an unarmed teenage schoolgirl with an iron bar? Have you ever seen them blatantly conspire with triads in suppressing young students? Have you seen them connive at people resembling these blue-ribbon members assaulting journalists brazenly before their very eyes? Have you seen a protester being escorted to a dark corner and assaulted by seven public security officers? Have you seen Mainland public security officers arrest the so-called fighters, fabricate information and evidence, talk nonsense, or backtrack on what they said again and again? The urban management officers on the Mainland are probably not as exaggerated or stupid as the Hong Kong police officers.

Load more

  75

Copy Link